... The president celebrated the ruling on Twitter: "Wow! Big VICTORY on the Wall. The United States Supreme Court overturns lower court injunction, allows Southern Border Wall to proceed. Big WIN for Border Security and the Rule of Law!" ...

... The president celebrated the ruling on Twitter: "Wow! Big VICTORY on the Wall. The United States Supreme Court overturns lower court injunction, allows Southern Border Wall to proceed. Big WIN for Border Security and the Rule of Law!" ...

Imagine if the Dem appointees were a majority on the Supreme Court.

The Constitution would be ripped apart. There would be no border control, and anyone illegally crossing into this country would be given de facto citizenship.

It was a near run thing in 2016 ... and I assume it will happen shortly after the 2020 election ... though I'll admit, so far de muc rats seem to be making a big mess of it ... but it is still early ... they have the numbers ... but perhaps not the electoral college ... time will tell ...

But at least trumpf gave us 4 years for the remnants of the constitution to continue to exist ... and that is an amazing victory ...

It was a near run thing in 2016 ... and I assume it will happen shortly after the 2020 election ... though I'll admit, so far de muc rats seem to be making a big mess of it ... but it is still early ... they have the numbers ... but perhaps not the electoral college ... time will tell ...

But at least trumpf gave us 4 years for the remnants of the constitution to continue to exist ... and that is an amazing victory ...

I don't think they "have the numbers." They have (have had at least) much of the media, intelligentsia, significant elements in media, tech and legal industries. They have some states pretty solidly locked down: but we have to note, that does NOT mean that even a numerical majority of VOTERS in those states are in favor of those policies. With the way districting, campaigns, voting (and voting regulations) and ample opportunities for 'soft' cheating, combined with a shocking apathy about how this tribe runs its affairs inside those portions of the Republic where it "holds majority" by opposition parties, they 'get away with' winning elections in certain districts which allows them to keep certain states and to teeter at the point of equivalence or slight majority in Congress at some times.

Most police forces all around the country are NOT New Totalitarian Tribe aligned. Most fire departments, virtually the entire U.S. military, and most likely all or most national guards and state militias are NOT NTT aligned.

The "power" they hold is largely through deceit, chicanery, bluff, manipulation, and peer-pressure. They do not "have the numbers" they have zeal, and megalomania. At one time, perhaps before Clinton got caught, and perhaps again briefly during Obama's reign, they had solidarity (or some semblance of it); they distinctly lack this today. They are un-American, unethical, deceitful, generally treasonous, irrational, self-important, power-hungry reptiles for the most part, and I am unable to conclude that even 35% of Americans are "okay" with that. Nobody likes to be on the receiving end of mafia pressure, and anyone who has been or is under threat of being can agree it is an unacceptable and intolerable way to negotiate and play the game. Nonetheless, organized crime still exists globally. This is not because "everyone is in favor of organized crime," it is simply because living in a free and tolerant society makes us vulnerable to such social cheating.

It was a near run thing in 2016 ... and I assume it will happen shortly after the 2020 election ... though I'll admit, so far de muc rats seem to be making a big mess of it ... but it is still early ... they have the numbers ... but perhaps not the electoral college ... time will tell ...

But at least trumpf gave us 4 years for the remnants of the constitution to continue to exist ... and that is an amazing victory ...

I don't think they "have the numbers." They have (have had at least) much of the media, intelligentsia, significant elements in media, tech and legal industries. They have some states pretty solidly locked down: but we have to note, that does NOT mean that even a numerical majority of VOTERS in those states are in favor of those policies. With the way districting, campaigns, voting (and voting regulations) and ample opportunities for 'soft' cheating, combined with a shocking apathy about how this tribe runs its affairs inside those portions of the Republic where it "holds majority" by opposition parties, they 'get away with' winning elections in certain districts which allows them to keep certain states and to teeter at the point of equivalence or slight majority in Congress at some times.

Most police forces all around the country are NOT New Totalitarian Tribe aligned. Most fire departments, virtually the entire U.S. military, and most likely all or most national guards and state militias are NOT NTT aligned.

The "power" they hold is largely through deceit, chicanery, bluff, manipulation, and peer-pressure. They do not "have the numbers" they have zeal, and megalomania. At one time, perhaps before Clinton got caught, and perhaps again briefly during Obama's reign, they had solidarity (or some semblance of it); they distinctly lack this today. They are un-American, unethical, deceitful, generally treasonous, irrational, self-important, power-hungry reptiles for the most part, and I am unable to conclude that even 35% of Americans are "okay" with that. Nobody likes to be on the receiving end of mafia pressure, and anyone who has been or is under threat of being can agree it is an unacceptable and intolerable way to negotiate and play the game. Nonetheless, organized crime still exists globally. This is not because "everyone is in favor of organized crime," it is simply because living in a free and tolerant society makes us vulnerable to such social cheating.

My bold emphasis above.

That is why they are pushing the Compact so as to bypass the Electoral College.They know that they will not manage to get rid of the Electoral College through the means of a Constitutional Amendment, so they have manufactured this end around process to do the equivalent.

_________________The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links

--And in 2016 they had two things going against them ... a lousey candidate (which might still be true in 2020) and a surprise result. In other words, the voters expected hilary to win easily so might have stayed home. That probably will not repeat in 2020. So I would expect them to have the numbers in 2020 again as well. Due to the continuing "butt-hurt" over the loss in 2016.

--And in 2016 they had two things going against them ... a lousey candidate (which might still be true in 2020) and a surprise result. In other words, the voters expected hilary to win easily so might have stayed home. That probably will not repeat in 2020. So I would expect them to have the numbers in 2020 again as well. Due to the continuing "butt-hurt" over the loss in 2016.

If, the playing field were truly level and both parties played ENTIRELY by the rules, and engaged in no forms of electoral fraud, AND those numbers were almost certainly accurate, then saying "they had the numbers," in that specific election, would be warranted.

I expect them to cheat as usual, though hopefully the general level of recognition of the true nature of the Democratic Party, and the modus operandi in the districts they control will undermine that to some extent.

We also have to keep in mind the nature of the two candidates and the parties which nominated them to run. "Democratic Party:" thoroughly corrupt and vigorous engaged in exploiting every crooked advantage possible. Also allied with most large legacy mass media and firmly enmeshed in various influence-peddling industries. In sum: they enjoyed many institutional and 'structural' advantages, although it does have to be noted that the split between the Clinton supporters and the Bernie supporters was probably a non-trivial disadvantage.

Trump on the other hand is not even a true Republican and throughout most of his campaign he was generally loathed by most Republicans, and in particular the most powerful ones. He was only accepted as their candidate because they HAD to accept him or else reveal themselves to be an undemocratic party. So any disadvantage Clinton suffered from internal division of her party between supporters for her and Sanders is at least equally matched with the degree of "lack of internal party enthusiasm" for Trump. Trump's chief strength is that he is a truly "grass-roots" candidate in the way that supposedly "grass-roots" leaders like Obama could only dream. Trump is a billionaire, but he also understands far more clearly than most of the mere millionaire swamp dwellers in the DC Beltway the minds of the average Joe and Sally voter on the street. He is as such, anathema to the special interest zealots who are some of the most outspoken proponents of the so-called Democratic party, because HE actually IS what they purport to be: for the people, by the people, of the people. Trump enjoyed little in the way of established electoral controlling mechanisms (either legal, questionable, or illegal) around the country. He had no established political power base apart from his longstanding celebrity status, and he honestly didn't have that much money or leverage with legacy media to promote his campaign. All major disadvantages from the standpoint of how Presidential election campaigns have evolved to be run since the time of Kennedy: i.e., as large marketing-instructed, high-dollar, public relations outreach campaigns intended to sway the middle and reassure the supporting pole within the electorate. Trump came from out of nowhere and ran as the "anti-Establishment" candidate, an absolutely UNHEARD OF occurrence (well, we have had "Independents" run a few times, but always people with previous political experience). From the standpoint of the political science textbooks on how elections are won, Trump not only should not have won it was IMPOSSIBLE for him to win. Nonetheless, he is supposed to have won 62+ million votes!? and in such a permutation as to win him a large majority of the electoral votes!?!

This is absolutely unheard of in modern history, and possible in the entire history of the country, I'm not sure. Fixating on the piddly difference in the number of actual votes is misleading, even assuming those reflect 99.99% legit and legal votes, i.e., are perfectly accurate counts.

How many votes did Trump win in districts which Clinton "won," and which are blue or purple regions? What do survey's say about how long voters in various types of districts across the country had been intending to vote for Trump prior to the election and what their current and historical party affiliations were?

There has been a trend in American history for the past 20+ years and that trend is: shrinking membership for both parties, and increasing skepticism if not antipathy on the part of more and more votes for those two parties. In sum, more and more Americans have been becoming silently non-aligned, a state of affairs which is only revealed through inferential studies of the rates of party membership roll growth/decline, and potentially from some national level surveys. We might call this the "Growth of Party Alienation," or the "Abandonment of Partisanism" by more and more American voters. This is not to say that the parties are nearly dead, they are not. There are far too many institutionally-aligned individuals, as well as institutional and corporate interests which keep them afloat, but they are increasingly unappealing to the average voter who is not a client of one of those politically-aligned organizations.

Winning through the standard approach may not work anymore and Trump may well enjoy a proportionally much larger share of votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. He may not, and the only truly useful indices we have to guess on this matter are indirect signs of the extent of the progress in the "Party Alienation" sentiment in the country. Nothing that I see or hear tells me that this trend of increasing Party Alienation is curtailing and indeed, it seems to me to be growing still more since Trump took office, and largely as a consequence of how the so-called Democratic Party and their allies, the New Totalitarian Tribalists have behaved in response to Trump taking office.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum